No, it was in an article about the new school board's response to the end of the lawsuit, which came out the same day as the decision.
It is my opinion that you are off base over the Establishment of Religion phrase in the Constitution. The major reason why Judge Jones nuked it from the curriculum is because it is clearly not a viable alternative to evolution as Science, particularly the version that the Dover School Board wanted to push forth in "Of Panda's and People". More than 2/3rds of the decision (from pages 1-85) not only discuss the religious aspects of ID, but also at the end it concludes very clearly at the end that at the end of the debate, there are too many statements (that the ID proponents make themselves) that pretty much reduce the scientific value of ID to near zero. For example (from page 68):
"First, defense expert Professor Fuller agreed that ID aspires to “change the ground rules” of science and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. (28:26 (Fuller); 21:37-42 (Behe)). Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces. (38:97 (Minnich))." (Page 68 of the Judge's decision)
And that's just one example. It is very clear from reading the judge's decision that nearly every argument made by the Thomas More lawyers in favor of ID could be traced to a religious aspect of some kind in this case (right down to the possible perjury committed in hiding who paid for the texts), and it is clear that when you invoke a supernatural entity to explain something, that the explanation is no longer science.
Now, there may be a form of ID that isn't based on religion(and we certainly haven't seen that version yet), but they weren't advocating that at Dover in the slightest.
Your argument that they were Establishing a Religion clearly has no basis in this case, what is evident is that the Dover School Board was promoting something that wasn't science even in the liberal definitions of the word.
He had NO AUTHORITY to make such a determination. He was charged with making a determination as to whether the policy on its face was a violation of the establishment clause. He was not charged with resolving the scientific dispute over the validity of one theory over another nor did he have jurisdiction to make that inquiry.
But the Lemon Test goes beyond the mere letter of the law and forces the inquiry into the motives of those who made the policy. That is a dangerous thing to do. If this policy had been instituted by concerned atheists or concerned Bhuddists rather than by concerned fundamentalists, then the policy would not even have been challenged.
Think about that, please.
This bald, out-of-context, distortion and misrepresentation of Behe's testimony is belied by the transcript of the proceedings. It reminds me of the way "60 Minutes" operates.
Cordially,